Today	Sun	Mon
Clear 18°/6°	Clear 16°/7°	Clear 20°/12°

33 Comments April 11, 2012 at 2:00 pm

cityscape

Duly Quoted: Frances Nunziata and Mike Layton

An unlikely alliance of councillors who want Metrolinx to rethink plans for the Union-Pearson Air Rail Link.

“Instead of running diesel trains for a business class premium fare express service between Union Station and the airport, we should maximize the impact of the provincial investment in the air-rail link…. We must build the air-rail link from the start as a healthy, affordable and sustainable electric transit line that stops in our neighbourhoods so Toronto can use it.”

—Frances Nunziata (Ward 11, York South-Weston) and Mike Layton (Ward 19, Trinity-Spadina), co-authors of an op-ed in the Star today. The two have worked together on a motion calling on Metrolinx to revise its plan for the Union-Pearson Air Rail Link. Currently, that plan calls for two stops along the line, at Weston Road and at Bloor Street; the councillors want the regional transit authority to add eight more stops along the route, in the hopes it will provide more useful service to a greater number of passengers. City council has no power to force any change in the plans—it can only request that Metrolinx do so, and rally public support—and will be debating the motion this afternoon at its monthly meeting. The motion is also backed by the Clean Train Coalition, a community group advocating that the diesel line in the current plan be replaced with electrified rail.

UPDATE, 3:27 PM By a vote of 40–2 city council has voted in favour of this motion.

Comments

Anonymous

Let the Air-Rail stay as an express. But let us get a Downtown Relief Line to serve local stations above Bloor Street, express below Bloor to serve Queen & Dufferin and Exhibition, leaving the streetcars to serve local needs below Bloor.
Anonymous

Please God, just build it already.
http://twitter.com/torkevo Kevin

tbh, I don’t really feel all that bad about the diesel trains. If you decide to move beside tracks that lead to/from downtown that have been there for 100+ years, you should know that A) there will be trains, B) there will be noise, and C) there will be pollution. They probably also paid less to back on to the tracks than other people in the area. The lines that should be electrified are the Lakeshore West & East lines because they carry 14.8M & 11.8M people per year, respectively.

Just build the line, use diesel trains, then once it’s up and running for a while, begin the switch over. They’re worrying about something that should be a moot point at this stage, as ANY train service is more important than the electrification of the line and the pacification of people who don’t think when they move beside a busy rail corridor.
- therandomdialer888
  
  Wholeheartedly agree. Electrifying the line would require expensive electricity utility towers every 40 metres or so. How much do you want to bet that the residents will start complaining about the scary “EM waves” emitting from the towers when they are finally installed? And what about the appearance? Someone is bound to complain about that too. Can’t appease everyone.
  - http://twitter.com/geoffdes78 Geoff DeSouza
    
    Don’t forget about the hum of the electricity. ZOMG IT WILL DRIVE THE BIRDS AWAY!
  - wcc
    
    We have more than enough electricity to power the needs for this system. We sell our excess electricity to the US and to Quebec. We have no problem with catenaries and the new ones look just fine to us! I guess all those people across Europe, Asia, the US and Africa are just stupid.
    - Rishi Maharaj
      
      The Province of Ontario has plenty of electricity. However, there is very little spare transmission capacity into Toronto, and an electrified rail line would require a lot of expensive permanent infrastructure like dedicated substations (like the ones for the subway system) since it will not operate on any of Toronto Hydro’s primary voltages.
  - Anonymous
    
    It wont be expensive if we build it the right way first. The Ontario Government is saying that it would be good to make it electric 15 years from now. Huh? Since electric is cheaper than diesel over the long haul (Metrolinx’s studies show this) lets do it now and save some cash for other worthy projects. I would add that it is NOT expensive to go electric. Metrolinx has quietly been reducing the cost per KM every year since their silly original “estimates” which were designed to speed the process and sour people on electric; electric that really bad idea that almost every single commuter line on earth is choosing.
- wcc
  
  Kevin, I don’t think you have been following the issue closely if this is your comment. Nor do you live anywhere near the Corridor. Some of the communities, like Weston, were there BEFORE the rail corridor and welcomed it because of the economic development it brought with it. We were founded in the late 1790′s and the trains were 60 years later — chicken or egg? And I am sure the new condos being build in Liberty Village are going for fair market rate just like the Robert Watson Lofts did. None of the communities it goes through would care if more trains came by as long as it was electric and there were more stops to service the very communities it runs through. Currently, we have less than 20 GO trains per day and that will only to up to about 29 – not the service we were promised. They have put more freight trains through a highly populated corridor without notice– why are the trains that used to go through the Ottawa Valley now going through the Georgetown Corridor? Anyone remember the Burlington derailment? Do you want to live beside more diesel trains carrying heavy or noxious loads? And then 140 more diesel trains for the ARL. That brings us to well over 250 diesel trains per day in residential neighbourhoods.
  
  You can come up to Weston or Mount Dennis or any of the other residential communities this line goes through and breathe our air. I dare you.
  - Rishi Maharaj
    
    So you were living in Weston in the 1790s?
- Anonymous
  
  Actually the Georgetown corridor has been pretty quiet for the last 30 years. Railapth was built because CP sold off its line. Agreed that expansion could always happen, but the corridor was pretty sleepy. The actual point is that people WANT expanded use of the corridor in a way that is smart. 2 stops for a billion dollars? I think we could do better than that.
Anonymous

You’d think the trains being used were spewing forth poison gas from some of the rhetoric being used. The DMUs being used with have lower emissions that the GO trains locomotives!
- Anonymous
  
  Ya so? We go from a few trains to a potential of 400 a day plus the Newmarket line that will ad another 48. So 448 more than 6 equals…..
  
  Tom West, do some research, just the basics will you?
  
  Oh yes one more point, its ALSO about smart rail. Do you think 2 stops and a price of 35$ is taxpayers money well spent? Look up Electrification EA on the Metrolinx website; even their own studies say that an electric system would be a better service and revenue model.
  - Anonymous
    
    I was talkign about emission *rates*, not total emissions. If you are concerned about the total amount of emissions, then trips on DMUs will produce lower emissions than the car trips they replace.
    
    The study said electirc would be better because of lowering operating costs, not because of reduced emissions.
    
    Personally, I think the line should operate a mix of express and local services. That way locals get better transit, and you still have a fast shuttle to downtown.
    
    As for fare, that hasn’t been fixed yet. I don’t know where you got $35 from.
Nick

It’s a bit late for Layton and Nunziata to get into this game. This has been in the planning stages for years, if not decades. Now that shovels are in the ground, I’d say build as originally planned (express, 2 stops) and then look at adding local stops as e.g. Eglinton LRT gets built.
- Anonymous
  
  This is Toronto: it’s never too late to call for drastic and costly changes to something that has already been agreed to, funded, and begun – especially if it means doing more environmental assessments or delaying the whole thing by three or more years.
- Anonymous
  
  They are not late. This motion in other forms has already been passed by previous councils. Its so easy to sit on your throne and say “build it” when you will never have to wear it. I say build it to the standards of modern rail and move as many people as possible using the best tech possible. This project has been in the rushed planing stages for a few years and the political stages for decades. Dont confuse the two. : ). An aside, SNC Lavlin walked away from running this as a monopoly 2 years ago…why?
  - Nick
    
    Re. SNC-Lavalin walking away: probably they realized it would be a pain in the butt to operate because of political interference. The ARL diesels are Tier 4 – so modern they don’t even exist in fact, with bettter emission standards than Mercedes-Benz BlueTec diesels (which one can hardly tell are diesels). Although I’d also like to see all GO corridors electrified – mainly because of the benefits this would bring in terms of greater rates of acceleration and hence faster service, sadly we live in a country of limited interest in investments in public transit. I’ll take what I can get, and yes, I do plan to “wear it” by using it. Finally, there was an RFP to have an airport rail service by Transport Canada in 2001, so clearly any motions that the City made over the years could surely have been incorporated into the design stage if not 11 years ago, maybe 3 years ago?!? I think the discussion to add other stops can happen, but that is separate from electrification. And separate from building a great piece of new infrastructure.
    
    p.s. I can hear those Porter airplanes you fly in on the mornings quite loudly when the wind is blowing from the south, and I live at College! Thanks a lot – but I’ll suck it up for the greater good.
Anonymous

Still, it’s great to see Frances in a role other than the Fords’ Angry Harpy fist puppet.
Doug Bennet

I’m in favor of converting the ARL from an expensive diesel service to an electric LRT service with more stops that also takes pressure off Bloor-Yonge subway. Electric service on all GO lines may also unlock real estate value above tracks – look at success of .
Chicago’s Millennium Park built on top of electric rail lines. Diesel freight service downtown might need to be re-routed but in the words of Daniel Burnham, “Make no little plans.” Diesel in the long run is more expensive, slower and holds Toronto back. Go electric. Congrats to Councillors Layton and Nunziata.
- Anonymous
  
  ” Electric service on all GO lines may also unlock real estate value above tracks – look at success of Chicago’s Millennium Park”
  So you’d consign travellers to a never-ending tunnel so developers can make a few bucks?
  - Doug Bennet
    
    Millennium Park is a public park with free attractions (concerts, kid stuff, art exhibits, etc ) that has been hugely successful and driven nearby development that has generated millions in new property taxes and fees for the city of Chicago, not to mention millions in tourist dollars for local businesses. Seems like a good deal to me for perhaps 60 more seconds of underground travel.
    - Anonymous
      
      Doug I work in Chicago and I love to fly Porter (which did not exist when this business class rail line was started) and they do it right. I was just in sourthern Illinois and taking the subway from the airport in Chicago Midway to downtown was fast and fun and cost me 2.50 and dropped me off right in front of my hotel. Trip length? Less than the APL.
      - Anonymous
        
        Wait a minute. You’re saying it’s evil to ride diesel trains to Pearson, but you’re perfectly fine with flying Porter and spewing jet exhaust and prop noise directly over the thousands of people who live and work downtown?
        
        All righty then.
      - Anonymous
        
        Read my posts a bit more. I am for greener and BETTER transit which is what electric offers. As a person who travels a lot I look at the total footprint of what I do and Porter is a far smaller one than flying in large jets that spew FAR MORE exhaust over Rexdale than Porter’s which have emissions that are 30% less than big jets and dont spend 20 minutes idling on the runway. I can take the TTC to the island and most of Porters destinations have a public transit option to get into their respective cities. I would also mention that Porter Toronto flies mostly over water unlike the big jets that on average circle 3 times over Rexdale per landing. If Porter was flying jets I might have a different answer for you but the reality is that Porter is a greener option as are electric trains. Sorry to also correct you on something else, I never said anything was “evil”, you did. You are welcome.
      - Anonymous
        
        Nice redirect. This isn’t about whether the island airport is “greener” than Pearson (per seat mile, it probably isn’t; plus, Porter flies their planes with about 30% lower load factors than Air Canada, wiping out any efficiency gains).
        
        This is about whether regions should sacrifice for the benefit of the entire city. Even with diesel engines, an express rail link connecting the country’s biggest airport to the region’s biggest mobility hub is an enormous benefit to the city. We need this today, we needed this twenty years ago. Another indefinite wait is not acceptable.
        
        If you use Porter, you apparently think it’s okay for downtown to accept greater pollution and noise for the benefit of the city. So why not York South-Weston? Because you live there?
      - Anonymous
        
        No offense intended but you seem to be unable to understand that I want MORE transit along the corridor and MORE stations which diesel cannot and never will be able to do. Its no good building a system that is greatly underused; its a waste of resources and a lot opportunity. The best footprint is to build it right once. I am for greener smarter transit that can be used by the most number of people. You need to do some reading because you think you know what the argument is about but you clearly dont. I have spent 5 years talking with MX people, transit advocates like Steve Munro, and people like Dr. McKeown from TBOH.
        
        I am going try one more time, an electric system is a better value, cleaner, and would reach a greater number of riders. Period. That is THE issue. And it can be done today.
        
        By the wayI have never flown a Porter plane that was less than 90% full.
      - Anonymous
        
        What you want in reality is to indefinitely delay an infrastructure project that is planned, funded, and vitally needed, literally weeks before shovels are supposed to go into the ground. Justifying this by saying you want is “more transit” (without funding or a plan) is like our mayor saying he wants subways all over the city.
        
        I love the assumption that people who disagree with you are not well read. The Medical Officer of Health expressed concerns, but he is on board with the current plan of diesels in the short term, and conversion to electrical in the long term. Steve Munro has no credibility on this issue: on his blog, he argued against the ARL by saying that all (yes, all!) transit expansion has a net negative environmental impact, because of traffic backfill (I wish I saved the link to that gem). The Clean Train Coalition hugely exaggerates the impact that trains will have on the community, ignoring vibrant communities next to busy rail lines like the Annex.
        
        Porter’s load factor (percent of filled seats) for March was 59.8. Air Canada’s was 81.5. Westjet’s was 86.2.
  - Anonymous
    
    A tunnel, like the corridor long series of wall that are now on the Metrolinx website that will be installed to protect residents from fumes that a few years ago in the “public consultation” were deemed not to be a concern. The “tunnel” is already on its way my friend. Again some reading on your part would help. No offense but electric trains would reduce the need for these walls. And in terms of developers I dont see any issue with any landowner increasing density in the downtown, making a dollar, or reviving a community. Although there is no tunnel really it has never stopped me from taking tunnel based systems when I travel and why worry; with only 2 stops on the line and few customers the trip will be fast.
- Suri
  
  Thanks Doug for the support! You obviously understand the issue and have researched it well. I, for one, am pleased to see my ‘right wing’ Councillor working with a ‘left wing’ Councillor. This is exactly how Council should work – for the betterment of the communities they represent no matter what the political stripe might be. Bravo to both of them. And bravo to Council for voting 40 in favour of passing the motion — that in itself is telling.
http://twitter.com/geoffdes78 Geoff DeSouza

Good lord, this is like the opposite of NIMBYism but just as idiotic. I won’t even start on the diesel thing because that’s the same level of stupidity as the anti-windmill people.

As for the line itself – yes, there clearly should be a stop at Eglinton. No ambiguity there. I assume the planners just assumed the LRT’d never be built, and I can’t say that I blame them. That would connect the line to three major transportation arteries when everything’s complete – Eglinton, the Bloor-Danforth line, and the Y-U-S line at Union. That would open it up to a LOT of people.

BUT THAT’S IT. Adding more stops before Bloor makes no sense, as you’d be reducing the speed of the airport train to provide service to people who already live within walking distance of streetcar or subway routes.

Now, if you wanted to tell me that you’d have a dedicated train running Bloor – Union 24-7, using a bunch of local stops, then I’d listen. But the point of this development is to improve service to the airport, not locally. But even then I don’t think there’d be a user base for it.
- Anonymous
  
  Geoff, I posted but it did not show. I will try again in a shorter form.: )
  
  It is nuts to not have at least a Liberty Village and St. Clair stop (then Eglinton). Isn’t the whole idea to get people to the airport?
  
  Electric is cheaper in the long run and not beholden to one energy source (electric is a sum of sources) plus there is zero argument that its infrastructure costs are lower over time due to it’s independence from a single fuel source and the lighter weight of the trains.Electric trains can slow down and speed up better than diesel so at the end of the day a few more stops might add a minute or two. A small price to pay for more people using and funding the system.
  
  8 more stops? Well no (for now) but electric with 3 more stops and many more customers? Thats the point right?
  - Eric S. Smith
    
    at the end of the day a few more stops might add a minute or two
    
    Trivia: Apparently, the London Underground’s rule of thumb is that stopping a train and then starting it again puts two minutes on to your schedule. That doesn’t include loading and unloading passengers.

Torontoist

cityscape

Duly Quoted: Frances Nunziata and Mike Layton

Comments

Advertisement

Advertisement

Social Media

Special Notices